Chiefs Larry Johnson loses Grievance

Frankie · 04-06-2009, 11:42 AM

Per profootballtalk.com

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/...teed-salaries/

Larry Johnson Loses Grievance On Future Guaranteed Salaries
Posted by Mike Florio on April 6, 2009, 1:11 p.m. EDT

The good news for NFL players coming out of last week’s combined Plaxico Burress/Larry Johnson grievance is that the forfeiture of signing bonus money has been significantly limited.

The bad news for NFL players is that Special Master Richard Burbank upheld player contract language invalidating future guaranteed base salaries.

Per a league source, Johnson’s grievance failed as to the question of whether the Chiefs are permitted to erase $3.5 million in guaranteed base salary due in 2009 and $250,000 in guaranteed base salary due in 2010 based on Johnson’s one-game suspension in 2008 for violation of the personal conduct policy.

With the future guaranteed payments now off the books, the Chiefs are expected to cut or trade Johnson.

Meanwhile, we’re told that Johnson’s grievance prevailed as to the partial forfeiture of his signing bonus allocation applicable to 2008, for the same reasons that the Burress grievance prevailed on that point — according to Burbank, suspensions don’t trigger a forfeiture of signing bonus money.

(Sorry if repost.)

bishop_74 · 04-06-2009, 11:42 AM

LINK

April 6, 2009 - Bob Gretz |

Special Master Richard Burbank released his decison Monday on the grievance filed against the Chiefs by the NFL Players Association involving guaranteed money in Larry Johnson’s contract.

Burbank ruled in favor of the Chiefs who removed the guarantee on base salary money for the 2009 and 2010 seasons after Johnson was suspended for one game by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. The contract contained specific language that would remove that guarantee. One part of the clause was forfeiture of guaranteed money with an NFL suspension. It does not mean Johnson can’t earn the money by making the team, but it’s no longer a guaranteed payment.

But Burbank did have something in his ruling for Johnson on his signing bonus. At the time of his suspension, L.J. forfeited a pro-rata portion of his signing bonus for missing that game. The Special Master ruled that money could not be taken by the Chiefs.

The question now is just what the Chiefs plans are for Johnson. There have been published reports that if the Chiefs prevailed in the grievance they would release the running back. That’s not necessarily the next logical step, however. Releasing him now wouldn’t accomplish anything but get him out of the building. If that’s what the Chiefs want, then he should be released by sundown. If not, then there is no reason to make a move at this time.

Johnson can also expect further sanction from the Commissioner on the two charges where he pled guilty last month. Goodell said he would revisit the issue after the cases were completed

crazycoffey · 04-06-2009, 11:43 AM

check it out on snopes first, damnit!!!!

**the Talking Can** · 04-06-2009, 11:45 AM

awesome

take that quitter's money

Frankie · 04-06-2009, 11:45 AM

Any improvement in trade value?

RustShack · 04-06-2009, 11:45 AM

Burress won his. I still hope we keep LJ, I know this increases the chances of us getting rid of him too...

**Skip Towne** · 04-06-2009, 11:49 AM

There is a load of hay leaving town at noon. Be on it.

SBK · 04-06-2009, 11:49 AM

We should be able to trade him for 6-7 #1 picks I'm sure.

Chiefaholic · 04-06-2009, 11:55 AM

If the Chiefs can land a high 3rd or better, trade him to the highest bidder outside the AFC West. If teams attempt to low ball us, keep him till an equal replacement is found.

CoMoChief · 04-06-2009, 11:58 AM

If we can get a 3rd or better for him take it. I could give a shit if he stays in the AFCW or not.

Coogs · 04-06-2009, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frankie

Any improvement in trade value?

Probably not. Signing bonus would have been on the Chiefs, and not the team who he would be traded to.

Crush · 04-06-2009, 12:00 PM

He has one hour to get the hell out of town.

Coogs · 04-06-2009, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

I could give a shit if he stays in the AFCW or not.

Me neither. If we have any kind of interior defense at all, we know it would be 2nd and 8 and then 3rd and 6 if they run on the first two downs.

chiefs1111 · 04-06-2009, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

If we can get a 3rd or better for him take it. I could give a shit if he stays in the AFCW or not.

Nobody is going to give us a 3rd or higher for LJ. We would likely get a 4th rounder at best and even the chances of that are slim,we would probably have to settle for a 5th...

kcxiv · 04-06-2009, 12:06 PM

Thats what he gets. I dont hate him or anything. I stillt hink he can play at a fairly high level, but he made his own bed.

04-06-2009, 11:42 AM
Frankie Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Casino cash: $10004900	Larry Johnson loses Grievance Per profootballtalk.com http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/...teed-salaries/ Larry Johnson Loses Grievance On Future Guaranteed Salaries Posted by Mike Florio on April 6, 2009, 1:11 p.m. EDT The good news for NFL players coming out of last week’s combined Plaxico Burress/Larry Johnson grievance is that the forfeiture of signing bonus money has been significantly limited. The bad news for NFL players is that Special Master Richard Burbank upheld player contract language invalidating future guaranteed base salaries. Per a league source, Johnson’s grievance failed as to the question of whether the Chiefs are permitted to erase $3.5 million in guaranteed base salary due in 2009 and $250,000 in guaranteed base salary due in 2010 based on Johnson’s one-game suspension in 2008 for violation of the personal conduct policy. With the future guaranteed payments now off the books, the Chiefs are expected to cut or trade Johnson. Meanwhile, we’re told that Johnson’s grievance prevailed as to the partial forfeiture of his signing bonus allocation applicable to 2008, for the same reasons that the Burress grievance prevailed on that point — according to Burbank, suspensions don’t trigger a forfeiture of signing bonus money. (Sorry if repost.)
Posts: 26,959

04-06-2009, 11:42 AM	#2
bishop_74 Veteran Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Denver, CO. USA Casino cash: $8654993	L.J.’s Grievance Decision In LINK April 6, 2009 - Bob Gretz \| Special Master Richard Burbank released his decison Monday on the grievance filed against the Chiefs by the NFL Players Association involving guaranteed money in Larry Johnson’s contract. Burbank ruled in favor of the Chiefs who removed the guarantee on base salary money for the 2009 and 2010 seasons after Johnson was suspended for one game by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. The contract contained specific language that would remove that guarantee. One part of the clause was forfeiture of guaranteed money with an NFL suspension. It does not mean Johnson can’t earn the money by making the team, but it’s no longer a guaranteed payment. But Burbank did have something in his ruling for Johnson on his signing bonus. At the time of his suspension, L.J. forfeited a pro-rata portion of his signing bonus for missing that game. The Special Master ruled that money could not be taken by the Chiefs. The question now is just what the Chiefs plans are for Johnson. There have been published reports that if the Chiefs prevailed in the grievance they would release the running back. That’s not necessarily the next logical step, however. Releasing him now wouldn’t accomplish anything but get him out of the building. If that’s what the Chiefs want, then he should be released by sundown. If not, then there is no reason to make a move at this time. Johnson can also expect further sanction from the Commissioner on the two charges where he pled guilty last month. Goodell said he would revisit the issue after the cases were completed
Posts: 3,642

04-06-2009, 11:43 AM	#3
crazycoffey .......... Join Date: Dec 2006 Casino cash: $4167901	check it out on snopes first, damnit!!!!
Posts: 28,392

04-06-2009, 11:45 AM	#4
the Talking Can Supporter Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: street Casino cash: $9372208	awesome take that quitter's money __________________ Clark Hunt: "Thank god for the Dominican pool boy"
Posts: 51,585

04-06-2009, 11:45 AM	#5
Frankie Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Casino cash: $10004900	Any improvement in trade value?
Posts: 26,959

04-06-2009, 11:45 AM	#6
RustShack **** That Noise Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Jack Trice Casino cash: $3136954	Burress won his. I still hope we keep LJ, I know this increases the chances of us getting rid of him too... __________________
Posts: 15,119

04-06-2009, 11:49 AM	#7
Skip Towne Supporter Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: T-Town Casino cash: $10004900	There is a load of hay leaving town at noon. Be on it.
Posts: 69,689

04-06-2009, 11:49 AM	#8
SBK Curry is the pick??? Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia Casino cash: $10004900	We should be able to trade him for 6-7 #1 picks I'm sure.
Posts: 8,153

04-06-2009, 11:55 AM	#9
Chiefaholic Veteran Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $492344	If the Chiefs can land a high 3rd or better, trade him to the highest bidder outside the AFC West. If teams attempt to low ball us, keep him till an equal replacement is found.
Posts: 4,830

04-06-2009, 11:58 AM	#10
CoMoChief Mahomes Dynasty Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Parts Unknown Casino cash: $7712254	If we can get a 3rd or better for him take it. I could give a shit if he stays in the AFCW or not.
Posts: 39,236

04-06-2009, 12:00 PM	#12
Crush Amateur Poster Join Date: Mar 2004 Casino cash: $2427091	He has one hour to get the hell out of town.
Posts: 15,298

04-06-2009, 12:06 PM	#15
kcxiv In Search of a Life Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Central Valley, Cali Casino cash: $8697996	Thats what he gets. I dont hate him or anything. I stillt hink he can play at a fairly high level, but he made his own bed.
Posts: 29,111